View - Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute

ECOLOGICAL STATUS AND PRODUCTION DYNAMICSOF WETLANDS OF UTTAR PRADESHV. Pathak, R.K. Tyagi and Balbir SinghCentral Inland Fisheries Research Institute(Indian Cwndl of Agricultural R e d )BPrrPdrpore, Kolkata-700 120, West Be@

ECOLOGICAL STATUS AND PRODUCTION DYNAMICSOF WETLANDS OF UTTAR PWADESHISSN 0970616 XMutrriol c.onminrd it1 rhis Bullrrrrr nury no! hr rupmduced, bl onyforrn,tcrfhour rhr prrn~rssion of !he publisherProduced oi : The Project Monitoring & Documentation SectionCIFRI. BarrackporePublished by : The Dimtor, CIFRI, BmckponPrinted at : Classic Printers, 93, Dakshindary Road, Kolkata-700 048

FOREWORDThe wetlands covering an area of 152,000 ha in Uttar Pradesh are very rich innutrients and have diverse ecological features with tremendous fishery potential.These waters have high potential energy resource but unfortunately the actualenergy harvest from them as fish is comparatively of very low order. The informationregarding the ecological status, energy dynamics and energy conversionefficiencies in wetlands are lacking and practically nothing is known about them.To fill this gap in knowledge, Riverine Division of Central lnalnd Fisheries ResearchInstitute, Barrackpore took up a detailed survey and in depth study of wetlandsspread over sixteen districts of Uttar Pradesh. I am sure that the pioneer~nginformation collected and documented here will give an opportunity to have an indepth knowledge for the optimum utilization of this vast aquatic resource, hithertounknown.D. NATHDirector

Investieation TeamDr. V- Pathak, Pr. ScientistDr. R. K, Tyagi, Pr- ScientistDr. Balbir Singh, Pr. ScientistDr. Shree Prakash, Pr. ScientistShri R, K, Dwivedi, Pr. ScientistShri L, R, Mahavar, T-5Shri Saket Kumar, T-5Shri B, D. Saroj, T-5

CONTENTSInrroducOr,studycvroEcdogical pornmeters goming produrlWSediment qualitywater qualityDynamics of chemical constituents and evaluation of productivityBiotic CommunlliaPlanktonBenthosPeriphytonMacrophytesEnergy dynamics of wetlandsEnergy transformation through primary productionDynamics of rnacroph)les and detritus energyEvaluation of fish production potential in wetlandsActual fish production from wetlandsFlow of energy in wetiand ecosystemComparisonof production efficienciesGuidein for h e management of wetlands in U.RWeed managementStocking of wetlandsCulture based fisheriesAdoption of capture and culture strategiesPen culturtOther developmental prioritiesCOI~CIYS&~Rrfmnccs&areudw rununary

lndia has extensive hhwata wetlands in Uttar Rad& North Bihar, I\llsam and WestEhgd. These wahA cover an estimated water spread area of nearly 3.5 laW hechuw andarc locally known as c k s , nuruns and pols in Bik, beds and boors in West Bengal,Assam and North ktcrn States. Large Mlow lakes arr dlcd tak jheels and dah inUttar Predesh and Madhya Pradesh and sar and &I in Jammu and Kashmir. Wetlands ueintegral part of river complex and should be identified and distinguished from otherecosystems for their proper utilization. Strengthening of river embankments as part offlood control measures or change in river courses have resulted in many of these waterbodies getting permanently disconnected from the main stream, categorizing wetlands intwo categories, open and closed. Open wetlands are wide and shallow with irregularcontours and are connected with the river either throughout the year through channels orin some part of the year, especially during flood season. The feeding river regulates thewater quality of such waters. Closed wetlands an dead zones of river or rivulets, whichbecome disconnected permanently from the main river due to change in their course.Wetlands are extremely rich in nutrients and have immense production potential as reflectedby rich deposition of organic matter and available nutrients in the soil phase. Till recentlythese water bodies had the distinction of supporting high level of bio-production in generaland fish yield in particular. But increased unthropogcnic activities in the catchcment areasand irrational modification of river basins. the ecological balance of these lakes have beenaffected. The rich nutrient status and shallow nature have led to excessive proliferation ofaquatic macrophytes in almost all the wetlands. Loss of water due to evaporation bymacrophytes, their death, decay and deposition at the bottom coupled with excessive siltingarc some of the factors responsible for the deterioration in condition of these watcr bodies.In recent years although there has been much concern over the rampant growth ofmacrophytes all over the world in natural lakes, streams, resmoirs and specially in shallowwater lakes, swamps and wetlands, but then is amazing lack of interest in studying theecological relationships which cause plant infestation and proper utilization of these aquaticrrrwnxsforMj~dwth1

In Urn Pradesh (U.P.) alone the walandr cover an a m of nearly 1 52,000 ha, majority ofwhich arc situatcd in thc basins of Gangs. Yamuna, Ramganga, Ghaghara, Gomti andKapti rivm. Although vast water &at is available under wetlands in the state but h eaverage fish production from these waters is barley 100 kg hx1 and there is a big gapbetween their potential and actual harvest. Although, some of these wetlands still maintaintheir connection with the parent rivm, many of them are permanently disconnected. Therich ecological status and vast production potential compel for evaluation of commonnlanagcment norms for the optimum utilimtion of these resources.Limnology and productivity of macrophytes and macrophyte dominated water bodies haveken studied by workers like Wilson (1939), Penfound (1956). Sculthrope (1967), Boyd(1968,1969). Lind and Cottam (I 969), Hanifa (1 978). HanilTa and Pandiam (1978). Pathaket ql(1985). Path& (1989, 1990), Suyunan (1995, 1997). Vass (1977), Jha (1989, 1997)have studied the ecology and productivity of wetlands in different parts of the country.'Ihcx studies have suggested various management norms for the development of wetlands.Odem and Smallcy (1959) suggested that even though macrophytes may not be utilizeddirectly, they form very rich detritus pool after their death and decay and the best way toutilize these watcr bodies is through detritus chain to make the maximum utilization ofthis niche. Although mimy studies have been made on the ecology and development ofwetlunds In difkrent parts of the country practically no attempt has been made on thewctlands of U.P. and still remain most neglected resource of the state.Fisheries development in wetlands presupposes knowledge of the ecology and flow ofenergy in thesc water bodies. Lack of understanding of the ecological principles, especiallyproductivity chardcteristics and improper management has resulted in rather low yield(100 to 200 kg b') from most of the wetlands of the country. In tens of potential thesewater bodies arc capable of giving an annual fish crop of 1000 to 1500 kg ha'l. Fullimplications of ecology, dynamics of physico-chemical constituents, flow of energy andnutrients in the system, aspects of lish culture and capture principles and variousmanagement measures in wetlands are examined here in order to bridge the gap ktveenpotential and actual production.

Ecological ~catus, production potential and fishaies rrsotwcs of tfiirty wetlands spreadova sixteen districts of U.P. were taken for mwfy in order to get clear pictun of the entirestate. Details of the studied wetlands an given in Tab 1. The abiotic and biotic variables,their role in production process, fisheries structure and yield and panems and extmt ofenergy utilization were critically examined in all the wetlands. Studies were made quarterlyduring the period 1999-2002.Ecological parameters governing productivitySediment qualilyIt is rather unfonunate that in fishery science the study of underwater soil has not receivedmuch attention, in spite of the fact that fish like agricultural crops is mainly the product ofthe soil. The study of water uithout any relation with the underlying soil gives only anincomplete picture its the column of water standing is always in dynamic equilibrium withthe soil on which it stands. Practically the under water soil works as a laboratory for theproducr~on of nutrlrnts, fronl the r n illalerial ~ which consists of organic matter and themineral constituents of the clay fraction of the soil. Thus, not only the total availablequnntity of the raw material but also thc requirement ofthe organism as to the suitability ofcondition of existence and food supply is the essential components of a productive soil.The major chemical factors of importance are pH, available nitrogen and phosphorous andorganic carbon apart from the physical composition.Thc physico-chemical characteristics of soil in different wetlands have been presented inTab 2. The physical composition of the sediment showed dominance of sand in all thewetlands (64.2 to 96.7%) with silt and clay ranging from 1.3 to 25.5% and 2.0 to 18.35%respecti.vely. In general the soil texture vi~ricd bctwwn sandy to sandy loam. Excqt Devasideval, which showed slightly acidic character (pH-6.5). sediment in all the wetlands showedneutral to alkaline. pH ranging fmrn 7.0 to 8.2. Specific conductance was high in all thewetlands (1 36 to 972 phos), except Devasi deval that showed low conductance (98.0jmhos). Fru calcium carbonate was gemrally high in the wetlands connected with Ghaghrariver, viz. Rmti and Mundii in Ballia district and Ratoi cal in Mau district (1 1.7 to3

14.3%). Tbe high values in thcae wetlands arc expected lu tbc fcading river Gb&a baaalso shorn high valua of fne calcium arbmate in the sediment p k . The values mgcdfrom I. I to 6.6% in o h . Orgnnic carbon, an index of productivity, was g d y high(0.87 to 3.68%) in ell the wetlands with few exceptions. Except Gagnikhera (0.8Th) theorsanjc carbon in all the wetlands was more than 1 %. The excessive growth of macrophytcs,their death and decay resulted in constant loading of organic matter at the bottom and thismay be the reawn ofhigh organic carbon in the sediment phase. Available nutrients, nitrogenand phosphorus were also quite high (298 to 635 ppm and 17 to 174 ppm, respectively).Large number of observations has shown that a slightly alkaline pH (7.5) is optimum forproduction. Highly acidic soils (pH below 4.5) and highly alkaline soils (pH above 8.5) aregenerally unproductive. Similarly soils with available phosphoms below 30 ppm are poor,30 to 60 are average and above 60 are highly productive. With respect to available nitrogenthe vnlues below 250 give poor results, and in the range of250 to 750 ppm are productiveand above 750 are highly productive. Organic carbon less than 0.5% could be consideredtoo low for fishery soil; in the range 0.5 to 1.5% the productivity is average while in therange 1.5 to 2.5% soil appeared to be optimal. If these values are compqed with the valuesobserved in the wetlands under study it can be concluded that they can be put underproductive class, with iew exceptions.Water quoliryThe biological productivity of any aquatic system depends on the quality of water. Thepmcess of energy fixation and utilization by the aquatic organisms and their whole lifecycle depcnd on thc characteristics of waters in which they live. Changes in the variouswater quality parameters and the dynamics of various physico-chemical constituents playvital role in the abundance and functioning of the aquatic organisms and the productivityas a whole. From the point of view of biological productivity the water is divided into twofundrmmtally different regions, one below the other, in which opposing processes takeplace. Thrx arc the regions of photosynthetic production (trophogenic mm) and the regionsof breakdown (tropholytic zone). The kinetics of the processes taking place in these twodiffmt zones urn be directly related with the productivity of the system, the gnatcr the4

atc ofpmdwh in the tqhgcdc zone (#omsynthetic) and gmtw rate of dccomposilionin the trophdyric mm, gmta is the pmductivity of the system. Both the production anddecomposition pnxwssts bring about substantial changes in the water quality and themcmamcm of the mte of changes brought about by these process urn be used to evaluateproductivity of the system. Among the physico-chemical factors influencing aquaticproductivity, heat, lighf turbidity, pH, alkalinity, conductance, dissolved solids, hardnessand dissolved gases like oxygen and carbon dioxide and, dissolved nutrients like nitrogen,phosphonu, calcium, magnesium etc. arc most important.The important water quality parameters of different wetlands have been prcxnted in Tab3. Water tcmpenture in all the wetli~nds varied within a very narrow range (23.7 to 27.3OC).Another important physical factor is the penetration of light on which the primary productionor photo-chemical fixation of energy depends. The clarity of water was quite high in thewetlands ranging from 45.7 to 137.5 cm. In many oftheni the transparency was more than100 cm and some of them were transparent even up to bottom. The penetration of lightwith sufficient intensity is one of the major causes of aquatic infestation in such systems.Among the chemical parameters the most important factor influencing productivity is pH,the index of hydrogen ion concentration. Observations made by many scientist in differentaquatic systems have shown that slightly alkaline pH (7.0 to 8.0) indicates productivewaters and accordingly all the wetlands where pH ranged between 7.0 to 8.4 can be classedas productive systems. The only cxcuptio~l is Dcvasi dcval where p1.l was slightly lower(6.8).Alkalinity or acid combining capacity of watcr is anotlicr important factor, which can becorrelated with productivity and is generally caused by the carbonates and bicarbonates ofcalcium and magnesium. k se along with dissolved carbon dioxide in water form anequilibrium system CO,+CO,+H,W

alkalinity ranged betweat 56 to 284 mgl" can be put under high productive wstas. ExceptDevasi dtval, Bansidah, Bhagnaiya, Sangara, Bahusi and Rataqm, which showed slightlylower alkalinity (56 to 87 mgl.'), in all the other wetlands it was more than 100 mgl-I. It isintnening to see that wetlands situated under different river basins havc shown fonsidcrablevariations in alkalinity, which reflects the impact of the feeding river. The clear examplesarc Naraini and Sama~pur in Raibarrli district and Loshar and Rainital in Pratapgarh districtsituated in Ganga basin, Alwar jheel in Yamuna and Bhadayal in Rarnganga. Since theabove rivers themselves have high values of alkalinity, wetlands under their basins havealso reflected very high values of alkalinity (232 to 285 mgl") whereas wetlands underother river basin havc shown comparatively lower value of this parameter. Specificconductance and dissolved solids werc also high in all the wetlands with few exceptions.Northcote and Larkin (1956) from the study of a number of lakes concluded that thedissolved salts in any sheet of water could be directly related withproductivity. Accordingto them the productive waters should have conductance greater than 200 pnhos and totaldissolved solids more than 100 mgl-I. Except Devasi deval (121 pmhos and 60 mgl.'),Bhagnaiya (182 pmhos and 91 n~yl.'), Sangara (I 3 I pmhos and 65 mgl-I), Ratanpur (128pmhos and 64 mgl I) and to some extent Rewati and Bansidah, the conductance anddissolvcd solids werc much higher Ilia11 the above limit of productive waters (2 11 to 706pmhos and 105 to 353 mgll). L.ikc alkalinity these two parameters have also reflected theimpact of feeding riven. Wetlands in Ganga. Yamuna and Ramganga basins have showncomparatively much higher values ofconductance (366 10 706 pmhos) anddissolved solids(183 to 352 rngl-') than those situated under other river basins.Among the dissolved gases oxygen and carbon dioxide are more important from productivitypoint of view. Oxygen is a regulator of metabolic processes of plant and animal communitiesand an indicator of the condition of water. In fact dissolved oxygen provides much moreinformation about water quality than any other chemical parameter. From large number ofobservations in diiTennt aquatic systems it has been found that a DO concentration of 5mgl" is quidfbr good gmwtli of llu~ui. Dissolvwl oxygcn in wetlands under investigationwas generally more than 5.0 rnyl.' but in some wetlands like Devasi deval (2.6 mgl"),Chandutal and Sikondarpur (4.6 mgl"). Loshnr (4.2 mgl"), Bhadayal and Mohene6

(3.9 mgl"), Nmhital(4.8 mgl"), Dahital(4.7 mgl') Md Sangara (4.9 mgl"), the valuesmrrbwn~m~hounbut~sharplywiththcprogrro~oftbedPy.Carbondioxide dissolved in water, fonns weck carbonic acid, which remains held up by calciumas half bound calcium bicdmmtc and completely bound calcium carbonate. This weakacid and its salts form a buffer aystem preventing the fluctuation in pH. the buffer capacitydepending on the concentration of bicarbonate. A stable pH is essential for the aquaticproductivity. Fne carbon dioxide either ahscnt or present in small amount is good foraquatic health but in high concentration it becomes harmful for the system. In all thewetlands under investigation, fm carbon dioxide was either absent or present in smallquantity (0.7 to 9.7 mgl-I), excepting Devasi deval, Mohane. Bhadayal. Bhaghar. Sangara,Ratanpur, Sonari and Saman jheel, where tlre carbon dioxide was higher (14.6 to 21.6mgl-I).Dissolved organic matter, which determines the chemical oxygen demand (COD) of thewater is another important parameter to be related with productivity. It has been found thatthe productive waters should have dissolved organic mattcr more than I mg1.l. In thewetlands under study the dissolved organic matter was quite high ranging between 1.6 to4.3 mgl". The high values ofdissolved organic matter in such waters is expected due toconstant loading of organic detritus following death nnd decay of the rnacrophytes. This iswell supported by tllo high carbon content in the soil phase. But in contrast to the richnutrient status of the sediment the nutrient status of water was poor in respect of bothnitrate and phosphate, with concentrations ranging from 0.023 to 0.432 mg1.l and 0.012 to0.378 rngl-I, respectively. Moyle's observation on lake productivity indicated the optimalconcentration of phosphate as more than 0.2 mgll. But except in Rohua, Mohane, Dabrijheel, Ratanpur and Aheewan, the concentration in other wetlands is generally much lowerthan the optimum limit. Similarly in respcct of nitrate it has been found that a concentrationof 0.2 to 0.5 mgl-' is favourable for fish production. However, the nitrate concentration inthe wetlands was much below the production limit with few exceptions. It may be recalledthat all che wetlands arc infested with aquatic macrophytes and large amount of nutrientsarr used and locked by thex rnacrophytes. Since rnacrophytcs have longer life periods, thenutrients taken up by them arc removed from circulation. Only after dcath and decay of7

mPaophytcs thcK nutrients an again releaad. Due to locking of nutrients by micmphyicaant their removal from circulation the WWSgradually shorn deficiency of nutrients.Caicium, magnesium and (0111hardness, e d for productive waters, can@ from 10.7to 30.0; 7.2 to 33.0 and 57.0 to 2 18.0 mgl-', rrspcctively. The high values of th*pananaasalso reflected good productive character of the wetlands. Like alkalinity and conductancethese parameters also showed considerable variation. reflecting the impact of the feedingriven. In fsct the high values ofdcium, magnesium and hardness observed in the wetlandss~tuatcd in Ganga, Yarnuna and Ramganga basins may be due to the impact of the river ontheir water quality as the above rivers have lhemxlves shown high values of theseparamaen. The variations in other wetlands also reflect the impact of the parent riverespecially in open ones. Other wata quality parameters, silicate and chloride ranged from2 0 to 9.7 and 7.1 to 23.3 mg1.I. Although silicate concentration was medium to poor inalmost all the wetlands but this does not seem to have much correlation with the diatompopulation. \\filch remained the dominant component In almost all the wetlands.Dynamics of clrrmical consliluenls and evaluation of productivityIn photosynthetic zone during daytime carbon dioxide is taken up from bicarbonate by thephotosynthetic organisms resulting in decrease of bicarbonate and increase in carbonateand pH. Oxygen is liberated and increases in concentration.6Cq t 6H20 = C,H1306 t 60,During dark hours (night) oxygen is consumed, carbon dioxide is liberated, carbonate isconverted into bicarbonate and pH dtcreascs due to increase in hydrogen ion concentration.The kinetics of two opposite chemical processes during two phases of the day is mflectcdin the die1 cycle of chemical parameten. In productive warn the rates of above reactions.re high and &nce the relative productivity of the equatic ecosystem can k evaluntcd

an the magnitude of die1 change in chemical paruneten. The die1 cycle of chaniulparamaas in Silcandarprn and Ratoi tal, the two extremes has been depicted in Fig I.A sharp die1 change in chemical paramctm like dissolved oxygen, pH, f' carbon dioxide,carbon& and bicarbonate have been observed in 111 the wetlands although with varyingmagnitude. The intensity of variations was minimum in Sikandarpur and maximum inRatoital. Dissolved oxygen, the most important parameter directly related to thephotosynthetic production, registerad sharp increase with the progms of the day, nschinpmaximum in the noon w evening and then showed declining tmrd. In wetlands Ratoi andRewnti, oxygen showed an increase of 10 to 11 mgll be- morning and evening.Carbonate and pH also followed similar increasing trend but free carbon dioxide andbicarbonate showed opposite trend, being maximum in the morning and decrenscd withthe progress of the day reaching minimum in the evening. Similar trend was observed inall the wetlands. Sharp die1 changes in chemical parameters clearly suggest the productivenaturr of all the wetlands. Fmm the variation in the magnitude of die1 change (especiallyoxygen), the productivity trends in wetlands can easily be evaluated.Rich sediment quality with high organic carbon and nutrients, optimum water qualityparameters and sharp die1 variation in chemical panuneten, all reflect high productionpotential of the wetlands under study.Biotic communifiesFloodplain wetlands are highly productive ecosystem and present diverse ecologicalconditions. They support rich varieties of biotic communities like plankton, benthos,pcriphyton, macrovegetation and weed associated fauna and flora. The relative abundanceand dominance of these groups vary from wetland to wetland and season to season,depending on their hydrodynamics and morpho-ecological conditions. However, onecharaaeristic biological feature common to all wetlands in Uttar Pradesh, is the moderateto heavy infertation of macmphytes.Planhon includes those aquatic flola and fauna, which readily drift along the wata cumntand mow imsistnntly by du wind action. This generally includes microscopic aquatic9

@bytoW(on) f- (toop-1. NytoplankeDo kine pbororyntheticpigments make w of tt)e inorganic nutrients available in Ilr wethad cooaynan radsynthcsizc~cmatln(~).Onthrothahand.~livaoo~~eaveof organic matter of plants and animal origin. Both phyto Pod zoopl&onsubstantiel portion of planktophagus fishery of wetland m o ~ .wtPin aOwing to the high rate of accumulation of nutrients, macrophytes compete withphytoplankton and under macrophyte dominated conditions phytoplankton do not getenough nutrients for their growth. The qualitative and quantitative abundance ofphytoplankton in different walandt have been presented in Tab 4. The group C h i m pdominated in 14 wetlands (35.6 to 72.9%) while in others Bacillariopbyceac showedsuperiority (35.3 to 57.3%). The possible dominanceof these two groups may bc facilitatedby the rapid removal of plant nutrients by macrophytes from the soil water phase. Thegroup Myxophyceae also showed higher percentage in about eight wetlands (35.2 to 74.5%).Ln Rewati and Rainital the bloom of Microcystis was observed during summer and wintermonths, indicating lower rate of absorption by macrophytes and enrichment of nutrients,which favoured blooming of blue green algae. Desmids were also recorded in some of thewetlands in the range of 10.7 to 31.7%, although king absent in many wetlands whenasRodophyce~e was present only in one wetland. A sum total of 74 species of phytoplanktonwere recorded in wetlands under study, comprising of 26 gntn algae, 17 diatoms, 18 bluegmns alpac, 12 dcsmids and one Rodophyceae. The species dominated in these wetlandswere Microspora. Ankisrrodesmus. Mougeoriu, Prorococcur. Bofryococcw. Synedra,Cymbella. Navicula, Frugllariu. Phormidium. Merismopdia, Anaboe~, Micmcysris,Tabellaria and Pedlasrrum.Total avaclpc phytoplrnkton population ranged from 59 to 17,734 ui", being maximum inRewati ud minimum in Ahcenvrn. The highest dcnoity (17,734 ul") recordad in Rcwatiwap on rcount of MicmystLc bloom.ZooplanktonThe quratitrtiw ud qditrtive abwhcc of mplankton have been shown in T& 5. Thegroup Rotifem dominated in 14 wetlands (35.1 to 88.6%), followed by cldoarrns

(35.3 to 70.1%) in nine wetlrads ud cope(37.3 to 71.6%) in sawn wetlands.~~domirvasonlyia~(43.f)o.Tkotba0roupawantithalbssntcu dbuted very low. A sum totd of 48 species of owplankton wae m dcd in thesemfluds, which include 18 Rotifaa; 2 Copepoda; 1 1 cIsdocuan; 13 Rotozoa and oneOstmde. Dominant species encountered wen Kera~ella, Brachionus, Daphnla,Diqkmosow Bosmino, Moina, Asplancha Synchaera, 'Euglena. Nauplii, Cyclops,Diopromus, ~ idopsis, Sido and Chydow. Average zooplankton ranged between 1 I to1609 ul-'.BenthosThe study of benthic communities in the wetlands helps in assessing the quantum of energytransformed through detritus as well as the trophic status of the system. The qualitativeand quantitative abundance of benthos in different wetlands have been presented in Tab 6.The abundance of benthic communities varied considerably in various wetlands beingminimum in Rohua (176 n m") and maximum in Rewati (1617 n my). All the wetlandsbeing rich in detritus energy, the population of benthos was in general rich. Mollusc (mainlygastropds) remained the dominant component of almost all the wetlands (48.3 to 100%).except Bansidah, Bhaghar, Sangara. Bahausi, Aheerwan and Saman jheel, which weredominated by insects (36.5 to 50.0%). Oligochaets and crustaceans were abscnt on manyoccasions and if present their contribution was low (2.6 to 29.2%) and (4.8 to 13.8%),respectively (Tab 6). The domtnant molluscan species obwwed during investigations wereIndoplanorbis uuslu~, Lymnaea accuminata, L, colrunella Gyraulus sp.. Pilu glohosa,Bellamya bengaloum. & sib chinomomids, which was the next important component ofbenthic fauna, insects were represented by their nymphs, while Macrobrachlum Iamarrerand Tubifx rub*wen observed among crustacean and annelids (oligochactes).In wetlands pcriphytons arc highly significant as primary producers, next only tomscrophytes. Periphytons assume greater significance in weed choked impoundments asthey tend to grow luxuriantly. The aquatic macrophytes act as sheet anchor for periphyticpmlifdoa. eitber in tenns of sub^ or in terms of nutrients supplier The abundanceof paiphpn in diPTcrcnl wctiandf has been presented in Tab 7. The population ranged11

ktwsea 1163to7101 ucm",bcing~minRohumaadrmnirrmmiaIkkijboel.~molrsoon month shod nMy poor abundance of pmiphytan that may k Itributcd tothe influx of floodwater and highty hubid conditions.Except Rewati, Sikandarpur, Bhagnaiya Alwar jheel. Rohua, Gagnikhera and Bhadayal,the priphytic community in all other wetlands was dominated by Bacillariophyceae (40.8to 85.1%). Myxophyceae was the major component in Rewati (60.9%), while others weredominated by Chlorophyceac (42.4 to 64.7%).Among the animals' only rotifcrs, protozoans and crustaceans were the main representativebut their contribution was of very low order.Wetlands of U.P. are highly infested with submerged, floating, emergent and marginalrnacrophytes. These macrophytes colnpcle with phytoplankton and restrict their growtheither by shading or locking of nutrients for longer duration. The evapotransition of waterby macrophytes and constant accumulation of detritus also deteriorates the condition ofthe wetlands. The extent of infestation, biomass and dominant macrophytes in wetlandsunder study are presented in Tab 8. Various wetlands were chocked with macrophytes tothe extent of 25 to 90%. in son~e of them the infestation rate bcing comparatively muchhigher (60 to 90%). The net wa biomass was within the range of 1.3 to 9.3 kg m2, maximumdomination being in Narainital and minimum in Ahcerwan. A sum total of 22 species havebw encountered in the studied wetlands of which Hydrillu, Cerrutophyllum, Potomogoton,Eichhornia, Nuja. Vallicnoriu and Chura were most dominant.Energy dynamics of wllanhThe energy source for all living organisms on the earth is sun, a vast incandescent sphereof gas, which releases energy by nuclear transmutation ofhydrogen to helium in the formof electromagnetic waves. Only a small fraction of this energy is transformed into chemicalenergy by producers and stored by them. The energy stored by the producers give thepotential energy mom of the system, as this is the available energy, which flows tocoa~umas at various trophic levels. In fact the organisms in an quatic system an interlinked

with onc &byenergy chin and ampd at vuiws mphw: levels dqmding on theirmode of obtaining amgy. Thus for understanding the energy dynamics of any system hvotypes of studies arc Cssmtid:1. Transformation and storage of solar energy into chemical energy by producen;2. Flow of amgy h m producm to consurnen at different levels @attern of enqputilization).Energy ~ramforma~ion through primmy productionThe process of energy transformation by producers is represented by the basic equations:709 cal6C0,+6H,O -------+ C,H,,O6+60,Solar energySolar energynCO,+n(H.donar) .-b(CH,O),,+ n(oxidized doner)This redox process is endergonic in nature requiring more than 100 calories of emrgy permole of CO, reduced and consequently plants can store large amount of energy in the formof energy rich organic compounds. From the above equation the energy required to liberateone milligram of oxygen through algal photosynthesis is approximately 3.68 calories andhence the amount of oxygen liberated gives a measure of solar energy trapped as chemicalenergy by producers. The eflicicncy of c~lcrgy transformation is known as photosyntheticefficiency and is equal to the energy fixed by producers during photosynthesis per unitlight energy available in the system in any given time arid space that is F=lIISx 100whereF is the eficiency, H the energy fixed by producers and S, the light energy available on thesurface. H can easily bc estimated from the amount of oxygen liberated. The productivityof any sheet of water directly depends on the eficiency with which producers convert lightenergy to chemical energy.In weiland ecosystem, which arc generally infested with aquatic macrophytes the primaryproduction is contributed both by phytoplankton and macrophytes. In such cases thecontribution of macrophytes is comparatively much higher than phytoplankton. Theavailable light energy. rate of energy transformation by producers and photosynthetic13

The light energy pmtdng tbe water nrrhce of dl wethods w in the range of 17,118,000to 19,45,000 in different ~IW of U.P. depnding upan latitude and bcncc variation inincidrnt light merlly wan of lower magnitude. But considerable variations wat obgvod8in mpbct of mr~y fixed by producers. The gross mgy transformation rates includiiboth phytoplankton and macarophytcs was in the range of 26,170 to 63,879 cal mad-'. Therate was maximum in Ratoi and minimum in Sikandarpur. The photosynthetic efficiencyin different wetlands ranged between 1.44 and 3.3704.. When compared to many othaaquatic systems t b eficiency in the wetlands was found to be much higher. Studies haveshown that nearly 59.0 to 78.1 %energy fixed by producers was stored by them and the mtwas losf lu energy of respiration. The variation in the rate of emgy transformation andphotosynthetic efficiency in various wetlands was due to the variation in both water qualityand producer population.Between the two types of producer populations, the rate of energy transformation byphytoplankton ranged from 3,705 to 19,927 cal m.' d.' and that by macrophytes from 17,908to 60,174 cal m.' d.'. Thus, about 5.8 to 38.8% of total energy fixed through primaryproduction was contributed by phytoplankton and the rest 61.2 to 94.2% was contributedby rrmcmphytes in different wetlands. Considerable varialions were observed in the rate ofenergy tMsformation by phytoplankton, being minimum in Ratoital and maximumsinRtwati while meuophyte showed opposite trend. On average 25.5% of the energy fixedby pooducas was contributed by phytoplankton and the m t 74.5% by macrophytes. Therate of energy transformation by phytoplankton in wetlands can be well compand withotha water bodies whve phytoplankton is the main producer group: However, the energyqmmted by phytoplankton is only 25.5% of thc total and thenfore calculation of potentialemrpy resource taking only this producer group into consideration gives an incompletepictura. Thus, for the estimation of fish production potential, the energy fixed by both thepod-groups must k taken into consideration.

Acawptudmodtlof~yte~inbw,wstlud~~pnsntedbFig. 2.Tbe ntte of input of energy to the living mcarophyte .sompuhnen! (BL) is PO, the grossenergy fixed by them thmugb photosynthesis. Losses of energy occws by mpiration (RN),excretion (RX) of organic manu, grazing (G) and mortality (M) all expressed as rates andthereforeBL-PG-RN-M-G-RX+BD (Detritus pool)MACROPHYTESK-lI (";' \ ,HerbivwesDEADNACROPHYTES(Detritus pool)PG = gross prim9 productionFig 2. Dynamics o/macrophpes in wetlandsRN = moaophyte respirationRX - excretion of dissolved organic matter BD = dead macrophytes (detritus pool)G = grazing; M = mortality; D decomposition and N nutrients.Most of the macrophytcs arc not grazcd directly by herbivom and the unused materialgets deposited at the bottom after their death (BD). When decay occurs these macrophytescontribute to the organic detritus pool, which is very important in the aqwic food webs(Odem nnd Smalley. 1959). Thc dead macrophytes can be estimated by studying detritusavailability, which refkt thc energy available at thc bottom.Thc awgy available as organic chrihu in different wetlands have bem prrsented in Tab12.Thcdetrit~~t11agyflu~turrtajbawetn 10.16~1O't028.00x10'K~d h",bdqmini-~hBbrhylld~im~hDabri~'hal.Th~th~caapycl~dtbk~~rIS

d&nuwsr in gmral very high in all the walands, which if judiciously utilized anincrease the m%y havcst from them m fidr d fdd.Evaluation offish production p ~en~bl in wetlanakThe productivity potential of any water body directly depends on the efficiency with whichproducers convert and store light energy in the form of chemical emrgy, because this is theavailable mergy, which flows to other higher trophic levels. W m (1975) and Uarm (1969)applied the mr~y flow approach for calculating fish production of lakes and reservoirskeeping in view that in passing from one trophic level to the other almost W? of theenergy is lost according to the second law of thermodynamics. Odum (1960, 1962) feltthat in open water bodies, which have wide range of fish spectrum belonging to varioustrophic levels, the productivity potential can be taken as 1% of gross or 0.5% of net energyfixed at producer level. Natrajan and Pathak (1987) and Pathak (1 990) estimated fish pro-duction potential of a number of reservoirs and wetlands by taking energy available at fishlevel as 0.5 of net energy fixed by producers. The wetlands under study have shown veryhigh production potential.The fish production potential (kg ha" y.') in different wetlands hasbeen estimated as 1283.5in Rewati; 756.7 in Mundiari; 680.0 in Rohua; 934.1 in Gujartal; 807.5 in Narainital;663.0 in Lohsartnl; 637.5 in Rainital; 965.1 in Chandutal; 817.7 in Sikandarpur; 760.0 inBansidah; 1012.0 in Bhagnaiya; 858.0 in Gambhirban; 829.7 in Salona tal: 767.0 in Devasideval; 1223.7 in Ratoital; 792.0 in Alwar jhccl, 788.0 in Dahital; 669.2 in Gagnikhera,828.7 in Mohane; 799.0 in Bhadayal; 1069.2 in Dabri jheel; 1309.0 in Bhaghar jheel;843.2 in Sangam; 703.8 in Ratanpur; 881.5 in Sonari; 1258.3 in Kuthala; 1326.5 in Bahausi;822.8 in Aheu~vm and 898.3 in Saman jheel.'Ihe potential ampy resource as fish in wetlands of U.P. has been sborm in Fig 3. In termsof anergy thaoe mtlaadr have the capacity of giving an mqy output in the range of765.000 to 159,1800 K cal hr' y'. On average tbwc walands have a fish productioapotentid of 913.3 kg hrl or 1,095,948 K d ha' of energy. 'Ihe Thc production potdal16

of these waters is of very high &andyield a good lmwot of fish without puning much effort.Adfih production from wrtIan&if the potentid cnqis properly utilizod they canThe actual fish production and contribution of different fish groups have brcn presented inTab 10. The fish prodmon from various wetlands of U.P. ran@ betwcen 43.0 to 357.0kg hrt being minimum in Rainid and maximum in Dabri jhecl. Among the various groupsmisccllamous were most dominant (3 1.0 to 59.3%) followed by carps ( 1 4.6 to 42.9%) and&I& (18.8 to 39.5%). The average catch in the wetlands systetn undcr study was 160.4kg ha1, mainly contributed by miscellmcous (39.1 %). carps (33.8%) and catfish (27. I%).The donunant species encountered in catches wert C' tnrihtulrr, C catla. I. tuhita, L. calhasu.L. genius, L. bola, P ricto. P sorunu. P .rc~how, H du~riconiu.r, W nttu. A secnghala, Aaor. A. mola, M cavasius. 0, himacularus, O pabda, A. colia. C. ranga, C ,xanta. C.batrachu. H fossilis, X. cancila. 0. bacaika, 0 pro, G. giurls, N. nandus, CC. gachua, C,punctatus. C. garua, C. labuca, N, noropterus, erc. and small shrimps.The energy harvest as fish from ~etlands and contribution of various groups has beenshow in Tab I I. The actual energy harvest ranged from 51,600 to 428,400 K cal ha" y.',being masimum in Dabri jheel and minin~unin Rainital. Miscellaneous group (29,577 to148,746 K cal ha-' y') remaincd ~ hs dotliiiiant convtbutor followed by tertinry consumers(I 3,5 19 to 93,391 K cat ha'l )..I). The contribu\ton of secondary consumers was minimum.Between the two primary consultlers, thc contrihttion ol'dctritivores (4,861 to 128.000 Kcal ha"yL) was comparatively much higher than herbivores ( 1.66027-418 K cal ha.' yl). Insome wetlands, viz., Sikandarpur. Bansidah. Bhagnaiya, Salona tal, Kuthnlo. Gagnikhera,Mohane, Dabn jhttl, Sangara, Sonari, Bhaghar and Bauhasi thc contribution ofdetritivomwas comparatively much better (5 1,122 to 128,000 K cal ha1 y.') and together with herbi-vores they contributed 28.0 to 36.3% olthe total energy harvest. As a result these wetlandshve shown comparssively haharvcs~ h 0th. Ihc average enetgy harvest from allthe w*lands was 192, 506 K cal hn' y'. contribuicd by primary consumers (28.6%),

secondary consumm (95.2%), tertiary consumers (27.1%) and mixelkoeous (39.1%).The variation in catch stuctw and contribution of various groups has direct imprt on theemsy harvest h m the wetlands of the state.Flow of energy in wetland ecosyste))~~Energy chains interlink the biotic communities in any aquatic ecosystems with one anoh.The complex relationships of food chain and flow of energy in community metabolism areof p t importance. A proper understanding of the trophic dynamics of the aquaticecosystem help in formulating policies for stock manipula~ions and better utilization ofpotential energy resources. There are two main routes through which energy flows in anyaquatic ecosystem, one of which has been emphasized much more than the other. The firstinvolver grazing of green organisms (producers) by herbivores or plant feeders, which arein turn taken by predators; thereby the energy stored by photosynthesis is transferred toconsumers at various levels. This is commonly known as the grazing food chain. Thesecond pthway. involves flow ofenergy from dead organic matter deposited at the bottomthrough the detritus food chain. The two pathways are shown below:Merbivores-+Predators+Grazing chainEnergy fixed arproducer level }

the flow of-in differat quatic rquaticecosystcmsand hiflighted the importmcc of detritwcbain. Garaally the studies on aragy flow through an aquatic ecosystem do take intorco~t the diffmt trophic levels but this approMh although appears to be simple, hasthe disedvantrge hat many fish are omnivorous and can not be assigned to a pmicularlevel. SimiJ ~ ty the feeding habit of the fish also changes depending on the availability offood. It appears that the most imponant single channel of energy flow leading to fishproduction is through organic demtus co~nplcx. which consist of decaying plant material.sewage solids and decomposer organisms. In some aquatic systems, grazing pathpredominates while in others most of the energy flows through detritus chain. Functionallythe distinction between grazing and detritus chain is of impornce as there is a time lagbetween direct consumption of living plants and the ultimate utilization of dead organicmatter through detritus chain.A general energy flow model of the wetland ecosystem has been shown in Fig. 4Ihe main primary producers in wetlands are macrophytes nnd nlmost 70 to 80% of theenergy fixed through primary production in such systems is by then). Rut thc encrgy fixedand stored by macrophytes is not utilized d~rectly by the consumers. Al'ter their death anddecay the energy is deposited at tl~e hotton1 fornlrng very r~ch detritus pool.As sho~n in the model the best way to utilize this encrgy is through detritus chain. Pathaktr a1 (1985) and Pathak (1990) studied the energy dynamics of a number of wetlandslocated in different geographical regions of India. It was observed that wetlands. whichwere dominated by detritus feeders and most of the available energy was utilized throughdetritus chain have shown much better production. But in wetlands where the availabledetritus energy is not utilized properly the production was of low order. The pattern ofenergy utilizalion from potentla1 to fish in wetla~lds of lJ.P has been presented in Fig 5.Studies in 29 wetlands spread over different districts have clearly shown that almost 60 to80% of the available potential energy is utilized by tertiary and miscellaneous consumers.The contribution of secondary consumers was very low. In some wetlands, where the con-tribution of &trims feedm or primary consumers as a whole was more. the energy harvestfrom t&m was comparatively bmer,19

Primary ProductionPhytoplankton/Mac~uphyta1Nulrtcnts IjlPredatorsI Detritus Pool1-Fig 4. Flow of energy in wellan& (general model)Comparison of producrion eflcienciuCompar~son of nvailablc detritus energy and potential energy resources with actual fishharvest and the various conversion eficiencies are presented in Tab 12. Good conversionefficiency indicates better management and proper utilization of available encrgy resource,411 the wcllnndq received almost similar l~ght energy and showed high efficiency ofenergyitatisf~~rnmatiot~ (1.44 to 3.3W0). but the actunl cnergy harvest, as fish was invariably low inalmost all the wetlands. Energy transforma~ion was maximum in Dabri jheel and minimum20

in W. The eaa~y corrvash efficiencies from diffenat s o w to M bve bandepicted in Fig 6. The c o n e from primmy fixed awrgy to fish ranged from 0.044 to0268%. Exccpt some of the wetlands like Salons tal, Gqnikhtra, Mob, D M jheelsad Sod and to ~omc extant Sikadarjw, Bansidah, Devasi.dsval. Dlhital and Sangma,the efhiency in others was very low. The poor conmion efficiencies in wetlands clearlyreflect the fsllun of ma~gemmt and Improper utlllzation of available energy.Odum (1962) observed that fishes feeding directly on algae or macrophyles have shownmaximum conversion from primary energy to fish. Nicolsky (1963) stated, "the nuver theuseful end product stands to the fist link in food chain the higher is the yield from watermass". Odem and Smalley (1959) suggested that the best way of utilization of energy isthrough detritus as detritus feeders ax the most efficient converter of energy. Pathak (1990,1997) studied the energy conversion of efficiencies in a number of wetlands located inAssam, West Bengal and Bihar and found that the wctlands, in which almost 70 to 80% ofthe energy is utilized through detritus chain, have shown better conversion emcicncy thanthose dominated by catfishes and weed fishes. These findings clearly confirm that thedetritus feeders, which have shown maximum conversion efficiencies, are the most suitablespecies for the better utilization of energy in wetlands.The wetlands ofU.P, are very rich in detritus energy (10.16~10' to 28x10' K cal ha.') butdominated by catfishes and undesirable weed fishes. The non-utililation of vast detritusenergy resource has resulted in poor yield and conversion efficiency from detritus to fishranged from 4.6 to 17.2%. The wetlands, which have shown better energy harvest, havealso shown the higher conversion efficiency (more than 10%). A comparison of the fishproduction potential and the actual yield clearly shows that only 6.5 to 33.4% of the potentialis actually harvested from the wetlands of U.P However, some wetlands have shown betterconversion eficiencies (>2Ph) as the energy utilization in them was more through detrituschain. In most of the wetlands the potential remained unutili7x.d. These observations clearlyshow that in order to enhance fish production fiom thc wetlands, the vast energy resource,as detrilus must be utilized properly.Guidelines for fubety management ofwetlnnds in U.P.Biological productivity of watcr bodies depends on the efficiency with which the solarenagy is rrappcd and stored a9 chemical energy in thc system and the efficiency with

which consumera at various trophic levels utilize this poteotid energy. The energyconvasion efficiency at trophic levels of c omers differs from one w ar body to theother depending on their biotic communities structure. A well-managed system will showhigher conversion efficiency from primary photosynthetic mergy IO fish or potential tofish but lower efficiency reflects poor management. Studies conducted in wetlands U.P.huve proved beyond doubbthat these water bodies have high-energy conversion efficiencyat the producer level but the poor conversion efficiency at fish level indicating about non-utilization of potential energy and management failure. In an ideal situation, the commercialspecies should share the ecological niche in such a way that trophic resources are utilizedto the optimum. At the same time the fishes should belong to shorter food chain in order toallow maximum efficiency in converting the primary food resources into harvestablematerial and thus reducing the loss of energy. Ecosystem-oriented management inlplies.increasing productivity by utilizing the natural ecosystem processes to the maximum extent.Some of the basic nianagement norms for enhancement of fish production from wetlandsin general are as under.Weed managementThe high incidence of macrophytes is a negative development in the wetlands, whichneeds to be tackled effectively for maximum sustainable fishery. The dense growth ofmacrophytes interferes with the fishing operation, reduces the phytoplankton population,\restricts the living space and movement of the fishes and deteriorates thc water quality bychanging the amount of dissolved gases. Studies in Kulia bee1 (Pnthak, 1990) have shownthat the production potential of wetlands increased sharply after clearance of a'quatic weeds.The management of wetlands, therefore, largely centers on the elimination of macrophytecover. In some wetlands the for~~iation of floating "islands" due to succession and piling ofweeds is a common phenomenon. The floating island not only causes hindrance duringfishing activities but nlso reduce the productive area of the wetland. There are three well-established methods for weed control:(a) Mechanical (b) Chemical (c) BiologicalIn small wetlands manual clearance can be done but in large ones where the manualclearance is not possible the same can be carried out by the application of chemicalweedicide like 2,4-D sodium salt a! the rate of 10 kg h-'. The weedicide kills the weed in

sifu and the released nutrients fiwn the dead weeds fertilizt the water to make it moreproductive. The d o m growth of mefrophytes can also be checked with the help ofbiological agents. The most promising species for the consumption of macrophytes isgrass carp, which is one of the fastest growing fish. The ~tocking of wetlands with grasscarp will not only control macrophytes and contribute to fish production but it will alsoprovide food for other species through its faecal matter as the fish is found to utilize only50% of the consumed material and the &st is released. The grass carp in fact acts as aliving manuring machine and its faeces lead to production of natural food. But the stockingof grass carp should be done only in closed wetlands in order to pment its escapement inthe riverine system. The quantum of macrophytes in wetlands has assumed such aproposition that no single method may be 100% effective and as such all the three methodswill have to be attempted in phased manner altho~~gli it is cost effective.Stocking of wetlandsBy nature wetlands a n extremely rich in nutrients and have immense production potentialas reflected by their rich soil quality. Hence, a proper understanding ol' the complexrelationships of soil quality, food chain, pattern of energy utilization e/c. will be of greathelp in formulating policies for stock manipulation. Any stocking program should takeinto consideration as far as possible the available food resources and their maximumutilization. In general these water bodies are very rich in organic detritus and the best wayof using this resource is to strengthen the detritus chain. In fact the detritus feeders haveshown maximum energy conversion eficiency. The wetland should, therefore, be stockedwith fishes oriented to detritus like (: mrigula. L. rohitu L, calhasrc, L timhriulus andC. carpio (the last one however be stocked in closed wetlands), C: cat10 can also k stockedin proper combination, especially after clea~mce ofaquatic weeds. Central Inland FisheriesResearch Institute, Barrackpore, has successfully demonstrated in Kulia beel, West Bengalthat fish production in terms of yield can be enhanced through stocking. It has been observedthat the production of the beel increased from 320 kg h" to 1077 kg h" by cleaning ofaq&cweeds and stocking with L. rohita and C. mrigala fingerlings @ 8000 h.'. Forbatn survival and growth the size of the stocking material should be bigger with an averagewight of 16 g each and 3 to 6" in size. The technology developed by the institute may beextrndcd in the walandj of U.P. also. Molluscan population, forming more than 70% ofthe total biomass with few exceptions, dominatw the benthic enviro~lent of wetlands in73

U.P. It was found that this niche of the system was under exploited, to a 1- aaadcausing substantial loss in told fish production. To utilize the nut population of mollusfssome fidm like Pangmius pangaciw may be introduced in selective wdanda. whichfeed upon molluscs extensively. The interaction should be watched carefully aad if theresults arc positive further propagation should be advocated.Culture basedjtkeriesOne of the useful criteria for demarcating the capture and culture fisheries is the extent ofhuman intervention in the management process. In capture fisheries the wild stock of fishis harveaed with little intervention on either habitat variables or the biotic communities.On the other hand in culture fisheries the whole operation is bed on captive stock with ahigh degree of effective human control over the water quality and other habitat variables.The main focus of management in Culture-based fishery is stocking and recapture. Thesize of stocking, density, growth period and the size at capture are the important criteria iiiculture based fishery management.Closed we~landsWetlands are the ideal water bodies for practicing culture based fisheries management, asthey are very rich in tlutrrents and fish food orgalll\ms. which enable the stocked fishes togrow faster. They allow hrgher stocking density and better prow01 perfomlance and thereis no irrigation canals or spillways, which cause the stock to escape. In a culture-basedfishery, the growth is dependent on stocking density and the survival is dependent on sizeof the stocked fish. Stocking of suitable species of proper size and density and their recaptunat economic size arc the determining factors. Thmfon, the basic management strategiesin closed wetlands should be centend onb Eradication and control of predatory species;b Selection of species depending on available food niche;b Site of stocking material and species combination;k Stocking density;b Proper stccking and harvesting sfhcdule allowing maximum growth period;b Site at recapture and selection of proper fishing geen.24

Cc'rphmpSkcries of the opcn wetlmdcSome of the wdands retain their rivuiae connection for a reasonably looga period andan comparatively fra from w d infestation. The basic approsch in them is to allowrecruitment by conserving and protecting the brooders and juveniles. These measuns haveadvantage of both conserving tht natural habitat as well as extending benefits for conscrv-ing the environment of the pant river. In captun fisheries management, the natural fishstock is managed and therefore, a thorough knowledge of population dynamics includingrecruitment, growth and mortality is very essential. In order to ensure recruitment thefollowing measures are taken into consideration9 Identification and protection of breeding grounds;9 Allow free migration of brooders and juveniles from wttland to river and viceversa;bProtection of brooders and juveniles by conservation measures, such as, observingclosed season during breeding months, imposing restrictions on juvenile fisheryand use of small mesh sized gears.Adoption of capture and culture strategvThe ecological conditions of wetlands, their connection with rivers, vast extensions andproportionately large shallow water areas, all demand the adoption of a strategy to developculture fisheries in sh~llow areas and capture fisheries in deeper areas. Any measure forexclusive development of only one of these fisheries may result in under utilization of thepotential and also wasteful expenditure. Conversion of marginal areas into culture pondsand leaving the rest of the area for capture fisheries is most economical and feasible solutionthat can be thought of. The lake like (open) wetlands are extensive water spreads withirregular shorelines. From the margin towards the centre an extensive shallow area existduring summer. It is estimated that above 30% of these wetlands can be converted intoculturc ponds and the rest 70% can be utilized for capture fisheries. The strategy for thedevelopment of closed wetlands has also been on the same line as open wetlands but inmost cascs proportionately larger anas (even up to 60%) can be covered into ponds.Pen cvhvnAs a management measure, especially in the weedchocked waters, culturc of fishes andprams in pen mclosun8 have drawn much attention in recent ycan. Pen culture offenscope for utilizing all avail&& water resow, optimal utilization of fish food organism

for growth and complete harvest of the stock. In lndia pen cut^ has kaa suocasfullytested for raising carp fry and fingerlings in reservoits and the cultm of tabk size fish inwetlands. Pm preparation is based on food availability, depth of the water body, setdavailability etc. The following aspects are to be taken into consideration before penfabrication.Site selectionPen size and deignPen materialIn exclusive carp culture, the suggested ratio of fish species isSurface feeders Carla catla 20-35%Silvcr carp 15%Column feeders Labeo rohita 20?!Bottom feedersCirrhi~rtrs mrigola 45%It is generally preferred to stock larger size fingerlings for better survival (10 to 15 cm).The stocking rate of the pen is fixed on the carrying capacity of the pen, however, in carpsmonoculture the recommended density ranged between 4000 to 5000 no h". while in mixedculture the density of carp and prawn could be 3000-4000 no h-I and I000 to 2000 no h-I,respectively.Other dcwlopmental prioritiesThe overall fisheries development of the wetlands requires both micro and macro planning.The major issues to be tackled under the development of sector approach are :b Formation of cooperative societies> Availability of finance& Change in leese period> Transfer of appropriate technology suiting local conditions)i Tmpori and marketingb Employment generation& Insurance scheme& Socioeconomic development

ConchuionStudies in thirty wcthx& s p d over sixteen districts of U m Rdesh revealed that thesewater bodies arc extremely rich in nutrients and have immense fish production potential.Tbe eaagy mource of drese wetlmds both in the form of primary fixed energy md detritusarc of vay high order, on the contrary the actual energy harvest from them is comparativelymuch lower. The low values of conversion efficiencies clearly reflected that the availablepotential emrgy is not properly utilized in almost all the wetlands. In order to fill the gapbetween available potential energy and actual energy harvest in terms of fish, the varioussuggested management norms should be adopted for full utilization of this rich natural=source. This will not only enhance the fish production from these wetlands but alsonarrow the gap between demand and supply of fish in the state and ultimately improve thesocio economic status of fishers dependent on these water bodies for their livelihood.

Reference#368.Boyd, C.E. 1968. Fnshwrrta plants: A potential source of protein. Econ Bol.. 22: 359-Boyd, C.E. 1969. The nutritive value of thnc species of water weeds. Econ Bor., 23:123-127.Chumpati, S.V. 1970. Energy relationships in natural aquatic bio systems in India. h p.Ecol.. 1 1,4948.Haniffa M.A. 1978. Secondary productivity and energy flow in a tropical pond.Hydroblologh. 59: 23-48.Wa, M.A. and Pandian. T.J. 1978. Morphometry, primary productivity and energyflow in a tropical pond. Hydmbiologia, 59: 49-66.Jha, B.C. 1989. Bee1 fishery resource in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Bull. 63, CIFRI.Jha. B.C. 1997. Salient ecological features of the mauns and chaurs of Bihar and theirfisheries. Bull. 75, CIFRI: 167- 174.Juday, C. 1940. The annual ecology budget of an inland lake. Ecology, 21: 438-450.Lind, C.T. and Cottarn. G. 1969. The submerged aquatics of university bay. A study ineutrophication. Amer Midl. Nar., 8 1 : 353-369.Lindemann, R.L. 1942. The trophic dynamic aspects ofecology. Ecology, 23: 398-41 8.Mann, K.H. 1969. The dynamics of aquatic ecosystems. Advances in EcologicalResemh, 6: 1-83.334.Moyle. J.B. 1949. Some indices of lake productivity. Trans. Amer Fish. Soc., 76: 323-Natrajan. A.V. and Pathak. V. 1980. Bioenergetic approach to the productivity of man-made lakes. J. Inland Fish. Soc. India. 12(1): 1 - 13.Natrajan, A.V. and Pathak, V. 1983. Patterns of energy flow in freshwater tropical andsubtropical impoundments. Bull. 6, CIFRI,Natrejan, A.V. and Pathak. V. 1987. Man made reservoirs as managed ecosystems intropical and subtropical India. Elsevier Science Publishers, B.V. Amstudam Netherland:93-109.Nikolsky, G.V. 1963. ?k ecology off~hes. Academic Press, New York: 362 p.28

Norhotc, TO. and Lakin, P.A. 1956. Indices of productivity in Columbia I h . JFirh Ru. &L C d , 13: 515-540.OQm, E.P. 1%9. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science, 164: 262-270.Odan, E.P. 1975. Ecology. Oxford and IBP Publishing How: 244 p.Ohm, E.P. and Smalley, A.E. 1959. Comparison of population emrgy flow of aherbivorous and deposits feeding invertebrates in a small mMh ecosystem. Proc. Nat,Acad Sci. USA, 45: 61 7-622.Odum, H.T. 1957. Trophic structure and productivity of Silver spring Florida. Ecol.Monogt:, 27: 55-1 12.Odurn, H.T. 1960. The role of tidal niarshes in estuarine production. N E St. Cosew.,60: 1-4.Odurn, H.T. 1962. Relationship between structure and function in the ecosystem. JapJ Ecol.. 12: 108-118.53.Pathak, V. 1989. Limnological features in beels - Abiotic factors. Bull. 63, CIFRI: 43-Pathak, V. 1990. A comparative study of energy dynamics of open and closed beels inGanga and Brahmaputra basins. Inland Fish. Soc. India, 22(1 & 2): 26-30.Pathak, V. 1997. Community metabolism (energy dynamics) in the context of fisheriesmanagement of small reservoirs and beels. Bull. 75, CIFRI: 55-63.Pathak, V., Saha, S.B. and Bhagat, M.J. 1985. Pattern of energy utilization andproductivity in bee! ecosystem,. J. Hydrahiol., l(2): 47-52.Penfound, W.T. 1956. Primq production of vascular aquatic plants. Limno. Oceanog,1:92-101.Reiley, G.A. 1956. Oceanography of Long island Sound, 1952-1954 IX. Productionand utilization of organic maner. Bull. Binghm. Oceanagr: Coll., 15:324-343.Sculthorpe, C.D. 1967. The biologv of aquatic vascular plants. Edward ArnoldPublishers Ltd., London: 610 p.Snenivasan, A. 1972. Energy transformation through primary productivity and fishproduction in some tropical impoundments and ponds. Proc. IBP Symp. On ProductiviiyProblems of Freshwater (Kazimia Dolny, Poland, May 1970).29

Sueuaw, V.V. 1995. Floodplain wetlands - A fisherig pmpcctive. Consemion andsusralnable use offloodplain wetlands. Asian Wetland Bureau, Kulalumpur, AWBpublication, 113: 13-15.Sugunan, V.V. 1997. Floodplain wetlands, small water bodies, culture-based fisheriesand enhancement - conceptual frapework and definition. Bull. 75, CIFRI: 13-22.Tcal, J.M. 1957. Community metabolism in temperate cold springs. Ecol. Momp, 27:283-302.Vass, K.K. 1997. Floodplain wetlands- An important inland fishery resource of India.Bull. 75. CIFRI: 75-82.Wilson, L.A. 1939. Rooted aquatic plants and their relation to the limnology offreshwater lakes. Problems oflake biology. Publ. Amer: Assoc. Adv. Sci.. 10: 107-122.

P Eoo~ir~lstudies, fuh production potential aod eaagy dynamics were studiedin tlurty wetlrndD of Unar Pradesh, spread over in sixteen districts of the state.b Stdimmt from all the wetlands were rich in organic carbon (0.87 to 3.68%),available nitrogen (298 to 635 ppm) and phosphorous (1 7 to 174 ppm). ExceptDcvasi deval (pH - 6.5) sediment was neutral to alkaline in reaction (pH - 7.0to 8.2)k Considerable variations were observed in respect of water qualily parametersalkalinity, dissolved solids, hardness and conductance, etc., all being minimumin Devasi &vat (56.60.57 mgl' and 121 pmhos, respectively) and maximumin Bhadayal (285.353.218 mgl" and 706 pmhos. respectively).> Water was rich in dissolved organic matter (I .6 to 4.3 mgl-I) but poor in nutrients(nitrate - 0.023 to 0.432 mg1.I and phosphate - 0.012 to 0.378 mg1.l) with fewexceptions.> All the wetlands showed high degree of die1 variations in chemical parameters.> The biotic setup of the wetlands showed considerable variations in respect ofquality and quantity. While 14 wetlands showed dominance of Chlorophyceae(35.6 to 72.9%), in othen Bacillariophyceae showed superiority (35.3 to 57.3U/~).The group Myxophyceae was dominant only in Reawati and Rainital due toMicrocystis bloom. Rotifen were most dominant component of zooplankton(35.1 to 88.6%) followed by cladocerans and copepods. In respect of benthicorganisms. wetlands were quite rich (1 76 to 161 7 n m") and in general showeddominance of molluscs (34.8 to 1Wh). Pcriphyton was also rich in all thewetlands ranging between 1 163 to 7 10 1 u cm".b The rate of ertergy transformation by producers was high in all the wetlands(26,170 to 63,879 cal m-I d") with efficiency 1.44 to 3.37%. The contributionof phytoplankton in the total being only 5.8 to 38.8% and the rest by macrophytes(61.2 to 94.2%).k All the wetlands wm very rich in detritus energy (10.16~10~ to 28.0~10' K calha-') and this resource must be properly utilized for enhancement in fishproduction.31

The fish production potential wps very high in the wdds rmehrgfiom 637.5to 1326.5 kg ha-), but against (his potential the rcturrl fish poduction wascomplrmtivdy much iowa (43.0 to 357.0 kg ha-') and there is a big gap betweenpotmtial md actual production.> Thc energy harv~ from studied wetlands varied from 5 1,600 to 428,400 K calhe-' y', contributed mainly by miscellaneous group (29,577 to 148,746 K calha-' y-I). The contribution of detritus feeders ranged from 4,861 to 128,000 Kcal he-' y'. In some wetlands the contribution of primary consumers was quitehigh (28.0 to 36.35) and resulted in better harvest.> Studies have clearly reflected that the available energy is not properly utilizedand the energy harvest from them was of very low order with few exceptions.In some wetlands where the contribution of cietritus feeders was more, the energyharvest was comparatively better.b The conversion efficiency from primary energy to fish in wetlands ranged from0.044 to 0.268Yo and that from detritus to fish, 4.6 to 17.2%. Although wetlandshave very high potential but only 6.5 to 33.4% of the potential is actuallyharvested from them. Except some wetlands, which have dominance ofdetritivores, the conversion efficiencies were very poor in general.b In order to bridge the gap between the vast potential energy resource and theactual harvest, several management norms have been suggested. As most ofthe wetlands an heavily infested with weeds, the weed eradication and theirutilization programmes should be given top priority. Other important measuresere stocking with proper species of suitable size and density. The main focusshould be on detritus feeders in order to utilize the vast detritus energy pool atthe bottom. Adoption of culture and capture strategies and pen culture shouldalso be given proper attention. Further, the fishermen should be educated tofollow the proper harvesting practices and not to use the destructive gears.

DbMdB.11~BalliaJaunpwRaeBareillyPratapgarhBastiSidhanhnagarAzamgarhMauAllahabadUnnaoHard01braillyBsrabenkiSitapurFarrukhabsdMainpwiRlmbuh-ohronGhagraGhagraGorntiGornt~GangsGangaGangsGangaGhagraGhqraRaptiRaptiTonsTonsGhagraGhagraYarnunaYarnu~GangsGangaGangaRarnganagaGhagraGhegra .GhagraGhagraGmgaGangaGangaGang8Wtbd 1RemtiRawatiMundiariRohuatalGujartalNarainitalSamaspurLohsarralRainitalChandutalSikandarpurBansidahBhagnaiyaSalontalGambhirbanRato~talDevasi davalDah~talAlwar jheelMohanaGagnikharaBhadayalDsbri jheelSangmaBheghar jhealRatanpurSonariKurhalaBahawiAhearwanSsmn jhedh a(b)1501502 50478845BOO80402302004960200438001405425048802001402 5080900634102 50110200

U2.wsamdRswati' MundiwiRohua ttdGuiutaiNarainitaiSamarpurLoh8MdRainitalChrndutrlSikandarpurBanridahBhagnriyaGambhirbrnSalontalDwuid*vrlRatoitrlAlwarJhwlDahitalQqnlkhuaMohanaBhdayJOrbti jhoalBhaghv jhulSrngaraRatanpurSwrlKuthrlaBJuualAhnrwmGMnrn Jhad73.885.072.071.870.276.075.279.391.006.603.796.787.568.275.881.204.687.070.686.870.886.089.668.087.870.064.276.066.688.5srcWnnnlqwlIryormrllrndr% % %1959.518.520.216.310.820.815.24.31.84.31.39.39.016.211.621.08,O21.710.716.712.06.721.39.219.326.616.518.313.2- w * p n -6.75.59.58.06.56.24.0, 6.54.72.72.02.03.22.88.07.214.54.07.83.84.53.04.810.73.010.710.37.516.218.38.18.27.77.57.87.77.87.67.67.17.47.47.77.66.57.37.27.37.47.17.37.47.67.07.07.48.17.28.18.0runho50735930638853647846439636021240430830041896972565280326416788466136244212328678262478618

GujvWNafrWtJSmurpurLohurtdRaitiulChandu tatSikmdarpurBansidahBhegnaiyaGrnbhirbanSalontal[)rva*devdRatoitalAlwajhedDahitalQqdheraMohensWmdayslDabrigluphvmwarsR.tmprrsauriK WBJuurim mWw124.723.825.324.124.824.726.226.026.424.225.225.425.624.724.825.525.723.723.727.026.027.027.026.327.327.028.36.14.86.64.27.04.64.65.96.15.35.12.66.27.04.76.63.93.99.76.04.86.86.37.78.56.18.07.67.98.17.88.38.07.58.07.98.38.06.88.48.27.68.27.77.48.47.17.07.07.47.88.17.77.63.24.02.73.60.02.86.36.05.20.02.719.50.00.79.70.717.821.60.015.016.314.616.010.36.78.316.31402841322692321301008781158146561962401031291922851942166260105139851342172245044124543662662241991823573161214805522342703517064574381311282133842283484171122522062271831321121009117915860240276117135185353228219656410616111317620810320812715313211910489681231095714515898107141218154144726197121841601621.84.12.63.34.02.41.81.82.02.92.61.93.73.22.11.74.14.22.43.62.52.01.83.12.62.32.90.0230.1210.0680.1380.0850.1500.0650.0800.1360.1350.2500.2420.0800.1420.4320.1780.2760.3400.3270.3060.3500.2860.2140.0120.1120.0790.0860.0340.0850.0600.0900.0600.0800.0400.1250.1000.0600.0960.0950.1360.1230.0300.2900.2040.1280.3780.1140.180,0.380.0.2400.1500.1880.2660.188

Chmdu tatRaoitdAlww jhwlD.hitrlGagnikhna

*&IWiRohw tdouircJNrdnitJSmupurLohuRjnnrlCh8ndu tdsikmdvpur8.nsid.hBW*.G r n iSJontalDevilri dwdRnoilslAlwvDrhkrlGagniWurrMohm%Id.yalD MBh.phu hSngrrR.tnplcSoruriIcumJIW a lAh.mm

W.tlurd- d ~ m ) I ,,admttC*.-. - . . .RMniI Muodiui60.9050.808.96.7PH.C.S,P.ECIH.C.N.EC.P,M ,Rohur trl40-807.3CH,ECtPsSGquCJ40.706.9C.H.ECNwrinkdSunrrpurLchMfRdnitrlChrndu t JSikandupurW9030-8040-7030-7040.8030-709.39.04.17.95.84.3V,H,ECPP,C,SV,H,S,EC,PEC,H.C.NAI,P 1EC.C.H.PNAJ,H.CH,V.C.EC,NH.CH,NAJ.L.ECiBansidah40-806.4CH.P,L,V.T,NAJ.H,ECBhagnaiya50-803.3V.H,CH,NAJGmbhirbm40-805.6NAl,H,S,EC,LS.lartal50.804.6NAJ,H.C.H,lP,P,ECDevrsi deval50-702.3NAJ,H,CH.L,C,N,ECRatoitrlAlwu jhesl70-8060-804.25.9H,P.CH,L,CN.NAJ,V,EC.H.T,P :Dahitrl25-602.8C.NAJ,V.EC,H,NGr~nikhera40-708.0H.P,EC,T.CHMohane30-604.6P.EC.T.NAJ.HBhsdayal60-806.8EC.T.NAJ.V,HDabri35.654.9EC.NAJ.V.HBhrghar jhesl30.501.8EC.C.H,PSmpur26.501.8C.H.P.ECRmmpur40-605.0H.C,EC.PSonui30-604.0V,H,EC.CH.PKuthrlr50-806.8EC.P.1P.HB.hruri40-705.8EC,H,P,CHAhearwan25-401.3P.C,H.ECSunm jhd35-593.0EC.P.C.HH - Hydrillr. C . Cerrrtophylum, 5 - Saginuir. P - Potomspston. EC . Elchornia. N - NymphearNAJ - Naju. IP - Ipomrr. L . Lhothelum. CH . Chur, T - Typhr. V . Vrll'icn~ir40

W*kdkatiMundiariRohua telGujutalNaainitslSamaspurLohsaRainitalChmdu talSikandsrwrBanaidahBhagnaiyaGambhirbanSalontalDevasi devalRatoitalAlwsrjheelDshitslGsgnikheraMohaneBhadayJOabri,ehnghar iheelI ~mgraWnpnI*"KuthalaBahwdw mSwnmWw*un -mOI E m d.rt.- rrrrnLm yU*Imk=x~ukW*produorn1,912.000 55,9741,912,000 36.9851.882.000 34.9411,892,000 32.9381,858,000 37.0701,858.000 31.5881.872.000 29,9091.872.000 30.6871,812,000 44.4341,812,000 26.1 701.804.000 33,4651.804.000 42,4711,838,000 32.8841.838.000 27.6361,894,000 28.2821.894.000 63.8791.945.000 32,9071,945.W 33.4761,842,000 27,1871.842.000 35.8131.792.000 31.0071,788.000 43.8131,882,000 51.5551,882,000 36.7021,850,000 29.3001,850,000 33.0051,868,000 51.4421,850,000 57.8151,878,000 31,4831,878,000 36,437IknU2.931.931.851.742.001.701.601.642.451.441.852.351.791.501.493.371.691.721.471.941.732.452.771.971.581.782.753.121.681.94~--KL-ilp~,m~-prodwMu gmu 0s nu19,9276.88611.8998.49811.75112.1337,55211.9076,6014.7893.8986.9658,0419,7289.9563 7057.16811.3828.5929.7416.66714.3714.8625.2854.2786.0407.87112.1133.5589,83836,04729,99923,04224.44025.31919.45522.35718.76037,83321.36129.56735,50624.84317.90818.32660.17425.73922.09418,59527.86324,34029,44246,70931.41725.02228.96543,52045.70127.92526,59968.259.256.260 062 959.064 060 062.771 865.568.775.469 378 370 469.567.971.266.874 470.573.372.969.377.170.766.267.871.2

IWtJOndRewatiMundiariRohua tslGujartalNara~nrlalSarnaspurLohrarRain~talChandu talSikandarpurBaneidahBhagnaiya1 GarnbhirbsnSalontelDevas~devalRatoitalAlwar jheelDahitalGagnikhereMohaneBhadayalDabrtBhaghar lhealSangaraRatanpurSonariKuthalsBahauriiAhwrwanSwnsn jheelAvuwActurl tbhprod-(kg hr.9112.749.482.0102.858.3No fishing62.043.0150.0175.0179.0211.0160.0245.0158.3142.0142.0166.7198.0220.052.5357.0190.0185.3126.8213.3211.4218.0166.498.4160.4W W m -supr (%I18.614.623.624.019.020.716.527.237.631.241.232.542.932.224.425.229.032.838.914.443.532.631.922.338.738.436.233.616.833.8c.IW(%)24.028.240.051.335.038.426.232.628.526.426.3y-757.457.236.424.746.040.957.340.233.942.432.530.225.229.828.528.224.230.026.226.421.829.424.839.618.826.432.828.024.027.127.331.938.047.146.446.837.234.959.234.738.043.338.242.535.231.038.459.339.1

-w-RewniMundiaiRdrwtdGui8rt.lNadniialSmarpurLchsvRsinltelChdu tslSikmdarpurBansidahBhegnsiyaGmbhirbanSalontslDevasi devslRatoitalAlwar jheelOahitalGsgnikheraMohansBhadwalDabriBhaghar lheeSngeraRatmpurSonniKuttulaBshuuAhwmrnSmunPuJArmP.Emoy.135.24059,28098,400123.40070.000No fishing74,40051.600180,000210.000214,800253,200192,000294.000190.000170.400170.400200,000237.600264.00063,000428.400228.000222.360152.160255.960253.650261,800199,680118.080102.506n*bkar4.3281,6605.1173,4552.9603.4221.9616,84010,9209,02212,66011.32819,9929.1 206.4756.4758,40010.45412,6722.39427.4188.2088.4504,26013,31020,79915,17312,3804.487--- --~9,861. .int in tot^-3.5162,1344.5263.9492,1003.1252.0609,36013.0206,87417.7249,21624,10810.2607,1576,8167,6158.55411,0882.01630.84510.9447.5645.47817.4059,63910,98710,7833.3069.966h*9-D1&l*17.3124,86113,57922.2128,2608,8544,48332.78055.00051,12274,00041.85682.00041.80028.00029,65042,00058.92579,0004.682128,00055.17655.02524.34588.36365.93068.53943.93012.04446.254OOa-32.45916.71739,30063,30425.00028.57013,51958,68059.85056,70766.59257.98474,00056,62061.85548,05348,49771,28069,16816.63293,39167.03255.14560.17048.12066.96485.90555.91028,33962,16677.82633,90836,81830,48031,64030,43029.57772.38071,21091.07582.82452,41697,87072.20086,91379.06693,48888,38792.07237.276148.74686.64096.17657,907108.78290,31881,09676.67769,904711.271

~ , . r ~ r - , ~ h j , ~ ;W n dRMNiMundiwiRohuatdOujuIJNuainkalSamrwrLohurRdnitalChndu trlSiandupur 2,010,000Ban#id&hBhagnrryasllontalDwsridevd 1,189,000RatoitdI Alwm lherlDahltrlGagnikheraMohanaAnnprZk..."-EnwOyav8Unbhaa-, r-rn fl*(Kc., W) ( K ~ ~ ~ V(Kd%v)J2,000,000 1,540,200 135,2401,280,0001,082,000808.040816.00059.28098.4001,080,000 1,120,920 123.4001.422.000 969,000 70.0001,426,0001,584,0001,220,0001.428.0001,284.0001,828,0002,384,0002,600,0001,724,0001,968,0001.382.0002,428,000Rhdayd 1,016,000 958.800Dabri 1,800,000 1,283,040Bhrghu jhwl 1.508.000 1,570.800Sangma 1,611,304 1.011.800btanpur 1.491 .I 76 844,560SonviKutbia1,569,814 1.057.8002,588,265 1,509,960BahwsiAheerwur2.018,0001.350.0001,591,800987.400SunmP.. 1,840.000 1.077.9601 6 1I INo Iiahing795,600765,0001.158.000981.200912.0001,214,400Gambhirbm 1,848,000 1,029,600995.600920.4001,488,400950.400945.6dD803.040994,44074.40051.600180.000210,000214.800253,200192.000294.000190,000170,400170,400200.000237.600264.00063.000428.400228.000222.360152.160255.960253.650261,600199.680118,060192.60611ConmfonrMcirnqlrn)PotrnPdlo~.~hn mrgy.0.~60.W40,0770.1030.0520.0680.0460.1 100.1990.1700.1630.1600.2430.1800.0730.1400.1640.2300.2020.0560.2680.1200.1660.1420.2120.1350.1240.1500.0890.1561 :8.86.512.011.07.29.46.715.521.423.520.818.629.520.611.617.921.129.626.56.633.414.622.018.024.116.816.420.210.917.66.84.8I9.111.44.94.74.212.610.416.713.911.712.316.06.69.910.117.210.96.215.315.113.810.216.19.813.014.87.210.9

Fig 1. DW cycle of chemical parameters in two wetlands mflecting extmme magnitudesfm9r '$1PH150120 r90 +so i1 h~J-~h30'LL00 -061W Rato~tal W S~kandarpurL L ~1Flw C02 and Csrbonate (mgl*)20 r-Bicarbonate (mgl-')$ L ~~-10 14 18 22 02 06 10 14 18 22 021 Ratofial W S~kandarpor::; ,L? ,0Free cam Carbonate Free csrbw, Carbonate1 M) dloxlde dloxde06 10 14 18 22 02 R.tdbl S1Llrd+pvW Ratoital WSlkadarpw906 W10 W14 Dl8 m22 m02I1

Saman Jheel

Eichornia infestation~acroph$e infestation in a Jheel

Trapa harvesting in a fheel